If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I don't think that this comes as any great surprise.
The fact is, that the majority of breeders do not want their Mri scan results to be publically accessible.
Maggie,
It's obvious that change comes very slowly through formal channels.That's just the way life is...inertia sets in and things reach an impasse with no obvious solution.
The kennel Club comes across as weak and indecisive about what they envisage as the future for the breed and what bugs me is the immediate calls across message boards for outcrosses to another breed,rather than supporting the breeders who want to improve health issues.
Now as for these wonderful caring breeders...
I've no doubt that they exist.But there's no unity between them,very little cohesion and cooperation.
If those breeders are serious about salvaging the breed,then they'd best stop faction fighting,put aside personality differences and start working together for the sake of the breed.
It's becoming Monty pythonesque...like the people's front of Judea vs the Judean people's front.
What's to stop, 10,12 or 14 breeders getting together quietly to exchange ideas on the way forward.
By creating a pool of stock....sharing health results,stud dogs,the best bitches and helping small breeders breed for health and not lose sight of the breed standard.
You'll be waiting a very long time for breed clubs to cater for the wishes of the minority.That's democracy for you unfortunately.
But by thinking outside of the box perhaps something more can be achieved.
Sins

Sins you always say things so elequently. I agree with what you said and I was quite upset last night about the outcrossing comments.

Amens to what Sins said..

Gracie's breeders are a good example. They are too busy blaming each other for her SM, instead of doing anything differently with their breeding practices. There are some affordable options in the USA for MRIs for breeders and if the breeders wanted it, they could negotiate for lower rates for a group deal. But they spend too much time competing with each other and whining about costs... if too pricey, then DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!! Raise a fuss!!! Get organized and start demanding it from vet schools and other places that could help. Enlist vets in your cause.

Sorry... just had to vent. I am tired of excuses about cost of MRIs. They could make cheaper options happen if they wanted to.

I don't think that this comes as any great surprise.
The fact is, that the majority of breeders do not want their Mri scan results to be publically accessible.
Maggie,
It's obvious that change comes very slowly through formal channels.That's just the way life is...inertia sets in and things reach an impasse with no obvious solution.
The kennel Club comes across as weak and indecisive about what they envisage as the future for the breed and what bugs me is the immediate calls across message boards for outcrosses to another breed,rather than supporting the breeders who want to improve health issues.
Now as for these wonderful caring breeders...
I've no doubt that they exist.But there's no unity between them,very little cohesion and cooperation.
If those breeders are serious about salvaging the breed,then they'd best stop faction fighting,put aside personality differences and start working together for the sake of the breed.
It's becoming Monty pythonesque...like the people's front of Judea vs the Judean people's front.
What's to stop, 10,12 or 14 breeders getting together quietly to exchange ideas on the way forward.
By creating a pool of stock....sharing health results,stud dogs,the best bitches and helping small breeders breed for health and not lose sight of the breed standard.
You'll be waiting a very long time for breed clubs to cater for the wishes of the minority.That's democracy for you unfortunately.
But by thinking outside of the box perhaps something more can be achieved.
Sins

Wonderful thoughts and comment here. I believe that there are small groups of breeders already working together, but I also believe, for the breed, a larger group needs to get together.

As I do follow genetics discussions and have a good understanding of population genetics I would suggest that those that are suggesting outcrossing (and I have been told by one zoologist that there have been these suggestions since 1998 re MVD in the breed) are doing so with the thought that the population numbers, with regard to Cavaliers produced by conscientious breeders, might end out too small to support the breed - the thought is that a population bottleneck has been created through illness in Cavaliers.

That is a situation that can be helped through judicious outcrossing. Better that than a lost breed. I know others are of the hope that there are enough in number to continue forward without the outcross. Those of us (and I am one) that are experienced in livestock breeding have less resistance to the idea of outcrossing while still retaining a breed, as in most livestock this is a regularly used tool.

I understand that the thought of outcrossing is unpalatable to many as they seem to understand that option as 'losing the breed'. I have difficulty understanding that and I don't believe I am alone. If someone could explain that way of thinking (why there would be 'upset' about outcross comments), I'd love to understand it a bit better, as I have wrestled with trying to get it for a number of years now.

...........The KC has concerns regarding the attitude of breeders and owners towards publication of the results and does not yet have a mandate to support results being put in the public domain...........

I wonder if this is a change of policy by the KC ? Did breeders want the KC/BVA Hip Dysplasia scheme results published, or the KC/BVA eye scheme results ?

When they introduce any other new BVA/KC scheme are the UK KC now going to now ask for a mandate to publish the results ? So can we expect no more new health BVA/KC schemes with fully published results in any breed then ? Or are some Cavalier breeders unique in their unwillingness to be transparent and open about health test results ?

Wonderful thoughts and comment here. I believe that there are small groups of breeders already working together, but I also believe, for the breed, a larger group needs to get together.

As I do follow genetics discussions and have a good understanding of population genetics I would suggest that those that are suggesting outcrossing (and I have been told by one zoologist that there have been these suggestions since 1998 re MVD in the breed) are doing so with the thought that the population numbers, with regard to Cavaliers produced by conscientious breeders, might end out too small to support the breed - the thought is that a population bottleneck has been created through illness in Cavaliers.

That is a situation that can be helped through judicious outcrossing. Better that than a lost breed. I know others are of the hope that there are enough in number to continue forward without the outcross. Those of us (and I am one) that are experienced in livestock breeding have less resistance to the idea of outcrossing while still retaining a breed, as in most livestock this is a regularly used tool.

I understand that the thought of outcrossing is unpalatable to many as they seem to understand that option as 'losing the breed'. I have difficulty understanding that and I don't believe I am alone. If someone could explain that way of thinking (why there would be 'upset' about outcross comments), I'd love to understand it a bit better, as I have wrestled with trying to get it for a number of years now.

CC

Its not that I have a problem with outcrossing if planned by a certain group of experts with a set plan, my problem is people blindly saying its the solution. All the comments of talks of the kc planning this or talking about it, or that even with those that are following recommended protocols and pet buyers supporting them isn't enough because the breed is already too messed up, gives no possitive motivation.

People talking of outcrossing is throwing out this scheme. If people talk about that then why are they even wanting this? I am just asking a hypothetical question. Things will take time and there are other breeds with SM. For people wanting to buy and support the breeders doing their utmost to scan and help the breed, when people talk of the solution of outcrossing, it just gives me an upsetting feeling. Why bother if everyone already gave up.

. . . People talking of outcrossing is throwing out this scheme. If people talk about that then why are they even wanting this? I am just asking a hypothetical question. . . .

Outcrossing does not throw out any scheme, nor hope for the breed or positive motivation. There can be more than one route used to resolve problems, and many differing routes can be used at the same time, working forward from those that give the best results. I don't think that is hard to understand.

Outcrossing does not throw out any scheme, nor hope for the breed or positive motivation. There can be more than one route used to resolve problems, and many differing routes can be used at the same time, working forward from those that give the best results. I don't think that is hard to understand.

CC

That makes sense. However, that would take time, careful planning etc.

Outcrossing does not throw out any scheme, nor hope for the breed or positive motivation. There can be more than one route used to resolve problems, and many differing routes can be used at the same time, working forward from those that give the best results. I don't think that is hard to understand.

CC

I think I am still thinking of a comment someone made about mri vs outcrossing

From your other post I believe that you read into it something it did not say. On the blog comments I am waiting for the original poster to get back on and explain.

In my mind saying/asking "Why is all this MRI-ing and research seen to be more sensible than an outcross and the elimination of the flat back of the head?", as rmholt did in that comment does not equate to suggesting that breeders give up on MRIs, research and heart testing. There is not mention of 'instead of' in the comment, but it seems to have been perceived that way.